Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Kalaiyarasan Vs The Passport Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

Home
Madras HC
2026
Kalaiyarasan Vs The Passport OfficerKalaiyarasan v. The Passport Officer

Disposed¶28

Kalaiyarasan v. The Passport Officer

Passport reissue – applicant implicated in criminal case

Madras HC10 Feb 2026WP(MD)/3620/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P.(MD).No.3620 of 2026, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, decided 10.02.2026 by R. Vijayakumar, J. Petitioner Kalaiyarasan sought a writ of mandamus (Article 226) directing the Regional Passport Officer, Tiruchirappalli to reissue his new passport considering his explanation dated 18.12.2025. Respondents: Regional Passport Officer (counsel A. Muthuramalingam, CGSC); SP Thanjavur and Inspector of Police, Koodalpudur PS (counsel M. Aasha, Govt. Advocate Criminal Side). Court noted petitioner's implication in Crime No.561 of 2021 and charge sheet in C.C.No.741 of 2024 (Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai); directed petitioner to obtain trial Court permission to go abroad (disposal within four weeks) and the Passport Officer to act per trial Court orders. Disposed of, no costs. Keywords: passport reissue, pending criminal case, charge sheet, permission to travel abroad, mandamus.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with observations/directions: petitioner to seek trial Court permission to go abroad; trial Court to dispose of any such application within four weeks; first respondent to proceed in accordance with law based on the trial Court's orders. No costs. No mandamus directing immediate reissue was issued as prayed. ¶28

Why is it important?

The petitioner is directed to approach the trial Court concerned seeking permission of the Court to go abroad. ¶23

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with observations/directions: petitioner to seek trial Court permission to go abroad; trial Court to dispose of any such application within four weeks; first respondent to proceed in accordance with law based on the trial Court's orders. No costs. No mandamus directing immediate reissue was issued as prayed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the first respondent (Regional Passport Officer) should be directed, by writ of mandamus, to reissue a new passport to the petitioner considering his explanation dated 18.12.2025. +1 more

Court's answer

Based upon the orders to be passed by the learned trial Court, the first respondent (Regional Passport Officer) is directed to proceed in accordance with law.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is directed to approach the trial Court concerned seeking permission of the Court to go abroad.

Key takeaways

If any such application for permission to go abroad is filed before the trial Court, it shall be disposed of within a period of four weeks.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Passport reissue — applicant implicated in criminal case — Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), single Judge (R. Vijayakumar, J.), disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 by Kalaiyarasan seeking a mandamus to the Regional Passport Officer, Tiruchirappalli to reissue a new passport considering his explanation dated 18.12.2025. The Government Advocate (Criminal Side) informed the Court that the petitioner is implicated in Crime No.561 of 2021 (Koodalpudur Police Station) in which a charge sheet has been filed in C.C.No.741 of 2024 before Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai. Considering this, the Court directed the petitioner to approach the trial Court for permission to go abroad; any such application is to be disposed of within four weeks; and, based on the trial Court's orders, the Regional Passport Officer is to proceed in accordance with law. Writ petition disposed of. No costs.

A

W.P.(MD).No.3620 of 2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 10.02.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

W.P(MD)No.3620 of 2026

Kalaiyarasan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, New Municipal Complex, Thillai Nagar,7^th Cross, Tiruchirappalli-620018.

2.The Superintendent of Police, O/o. The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Koodalpudur Police Station, Madurai City. ... Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the Respondent No.1 to Reissue New Passport to the petitioner by considering his explanation dated 18.12.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Nihar Ali

1/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.(MD).No.3620 of 2026

For R1 : Mr.A.Muthuramalingam, Central Government Standing Counsel For R2 and R3 : Mrs.M.Aasha, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

O R D E R

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a mandamus directing

the first respondent to reissue passport to the writ petitioner based upon his explanation dated 18.12.2025.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the second and third respondents brought to the notice of the Court that the petitioner has been implicated in a criminal case in Crime No.561 of 2021 on the file of third respondent which has culminated in filing of a charge sheet in C.C.No.741 of 2024 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai.

Considering the above said facts, the petitioner is directed to approach the trial Court concerned seeking permission of the Court to go

2/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.(MD).No.3620 of 2026

abroad. In case if any such application is filed, the same shall be disposed of within a period of four weeks. Based upon the orders to be passed by the learned trial Court, the first respondent is directed to proceed in accordance with law.

4. With the above said observations, this writ petition stands disposed

of. No costs.

10.02.2026

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No pal

To

1.The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, New Municipal Complex, Thillai Nagar,7^th Cross, Tiruchirappalli-620018.

2.The Superintendent of Police, O/o. The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Koodalpudur Police Station, Madurai City.

3/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.(MD).No.3620 of 2026

R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.

pal

W.P(MD)No.3620 of 2026

10.02.2026

4/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the first respondent (Regional Passport Officer) should be directed, by writ of mandamus, to reissue a new passport to the petitioner considering his explanation dated 18.12.2025.¶21
The court held
Based upon the orders to be passed by the learned trial Court, the first respondent (Regional Passport Officer) is directed to proceed in accordance with law.ratio¶27
2.
How the pendency of the criminal case against the petitioner (Crime No.561 of 2021; charge sheet in C.C.No.741 of 2024 before Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai) bears on the reissue of his passport and his travel abroad.medium confidence¶22
The court held
The petitioner is directed to approach the trial Court concerned seeking permission of the Court to go abroad.ratio¶23

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226¶13

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Petitioner implicated in a criminal case in Crime No.561 of 2021 on the file of the third respondent (Koodalpudur Police Station), as noticed by the Government Advocate (Criminal Side).¶22
Prior proceeding
The said criminal case culminated in filing of a charge sheet in C.C.No.741 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai.¶22
Prior proceeding
Petitioner had submitted an explanation dated 18.12.2025 to Respondent No.1 in support of his request for reissue of a new passport.¶13

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Kalaiyarasan¶7
S.Nihar Ali
respondent
The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, New Municipal Complex, Thillai Nagar, 7th Cross, Tiruchirappalli-620018¶10
A.Muthuramalingam
respondent
The Superintendent of Police, O/o. The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District¶11
M.Aasha
respondent
The Inspector of Police, Koodalpudur Police Station, Madurai City¶12
M.Aasha

Coram

AI extract

R.VIJAYAKUMARauthor¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 10 Feb 2026 · February
Registered: 6 Feb 2026
Case no.: WP(MD)/3620/2026
CNR: HCMD010180452026
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: R.vijayakumar
Disposal: DISPOSED OF
Case type: W.P.(MD)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from R.vijayakumar

K.Raja Mohamed Vs The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu
9 Feb 2026
Usha Vs The Tahsildar
9 Feb 2026
Vishwanathan Vs The Executive Engineer cum Administrative Officer
9 Feb 2026
Chelliah Mahendran Vs The Regional Passport Office
10 Feb 2026
Lilly Pushpam Vs The Assistant Engineer
10 Feb 2026
S.John Stephen Vs The District Collector
10 Feb 2026

Cite this judgement

Kalaiyarasan v. The Passport Officer, WP(MD)/3620/2026 (MAD), decided on 10 February 2026.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Petitioner implicated in a criminal case in Crime No.561 of 2021 on the file of the third respondent (Koodalpudur Police Station), as noticed by the Government Advocate (Criminal Side).
The said criminal case culminated in filing of a charge sheet in C.C.No.741 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai.

View full history

Bench / Coram

R.VIJAYAKUMAR

Parties & counsel